2009 Honda Fit: Driving Style And Fuel Economy

I've exceeded 40.0 mpg in my Focus seven times (seven tanks). It is rated at 33 highway like your Fit. The average for my last ten tanks (total miles traveled / total fuel consumed) is 38.2 mpg. So 39.0 in a Fit is feasible, and probably repeatable. In fact, from personal experience with a wide variety of cars (for a non-car-mag employee, anyway), I've found that conservative driving can yield >20% better mileage than the EPA's highway estimate.

I've had quite a number of tanks in the 37-39 mpg range with my Fit. The best tank was 39.x calculated (42.4 indicated on the gauge). But I've always been able to beat the EPA numbers with manual transmission vehicles.

I once got 35mpg in a Civic Si. I used that number to justify the Civic Si as a economy car vs my wife's old Corolla.

And u can get 15mpg ONCE and use it to justify it as gas guzzler.....
Only once aint gonna cut it.

I'm honestly surprised when you said you said you got 33.9 mpg after 190 miles of mostly highway driving. Was that highway continuously going uphill? At 70 mph my Fit will get around 42-44 mpg, manually calculated. Gosh, the 1 year plus I had the car I consistently get around 35 mpg average in MIXED driving. Maybe your car has something wrong going with it?

Where has this editor been? Go to the Fit message boards and plenty of owners getting very high 30's and low 40's (manually calculated as well). I've gotten a steady 37.2 mpg out of my 09 Fit since I purchased it January of this year. It's a manual transmission sport just like this long-term test car. I shift at 3,500 rpms and I keep my speed to no more than 70 mph on the freeway. My 40 mile daily work commute is 30% city/70% highway. Due to the heavy traffic I always have to deal with it's probably more like 50%/50%, as there are very few times I get to exceed 60 mph, constant stop and go. I keep my gas receipts and reset the trip meter to zero after every fill-up, 37.2 consistently.

The only people surprised about the much higher mileage than the EPA ratings are those who don't own a Fit or those like this editor who don't drive it much. Otherwise it's not a surprise to owners.

With all the bitching about the wonderful manual transmission and the poor gas mileage at 70 mph with cruise control (I got 40 mpg under those same conditions) it further adds fuel to the fire something is wrong with the Fit they got for testing. They are the only ones to ever complain about the transmission and with the low highway mileage, sounds like they got a lemon or they did not break the engine and transmission in properly.

More proof you guys have a lemon? Look at the 2009 models here. They average 34-35 mpg as well:

http://fueleconomy.gov/mpg/MPG.do?action=browseList2&make=Honda&model=Fit

I've noticed in my Fit that it's pretty sensitive to the type of terrain you're driving on. For example, I drive on two routes that are about the same distance, but one's hilly and the other is mostly flat. On the hilly route, I get about 34-35 mpg highway (I have an auto). On the flat route, I get over 40 mpg, and my style isn't any different (in fact, if anything, I drive more aggressively on the flat route).

Anyway, another source of real fuel economy ratings is at fuelly:
http://www.fuelly.com/car/honda/fit/2009

These guys drive so many different cars that they rarely have a chance to get use to any specific car as to maximise the mpg for a car like the Fit. People who bought the Fit are looking for the best mpg they can get and tend to drive with this in mind. The testers get to drive a car to comment on it, they are not trying to get the 40+ mpg we are.

BTW my best mpg is 41.2 calculated (45.4 by guage) on a 120 mile drive, 95% highway.

I've pointed out several times that the Monroney sticker clearly posts the EPA's expected range of results along with the averages. The Fit is not unique. Any car that achieves 33 mpg on the EPA highway test can be expected to achieve between 27 and 39 mpg for "most" drivers. Drive really hard or really gently, and you can do even better or worse. My car has an EPA highway estimate of 28 mpg, and I routinely get in the low-to-mid-30s; best full tank was 34.9, and best partial tank was 37. Worst tank so far was 22 and change, but that was still above the EPA average 21 mpg city (17 to 25 expected range for most drivers).

Not so. Many cars achieve WAY LESS than their EPA ratings. Then some fall right in line with their ratings. The Fit's ratings, like the new Insight's, are very conservative.

They have a lemon, LOL..

They just have people that drive this thing without impeding traffic, 40mpg at 70mph is barely believable. Receipts??????

Another bad Fit? I laughed my ass off when the last Fit bit the dust but I kind of doubt they have another bad one. 33 seems a little low for such a small car, but there are so many variables involved who knows why.

Everyone isn't going to get the exact same average or MPG as overall driving style, weather, location and terrain play the largest roles here. That said, there is nothing wrong with Edmunds LT 2009 Honda Fit Sport.

In regards to EPA ratings, many people I know with Fit's and Civic's (Civic Si included) can easily best the EPA estimates especially while cruising. My secretary has a 2006 Civic LX coupe 5AT and she calculated 42mpg on a trip to Florida (from Ky) and that well exceeds the EPA hwy estimate. People need to realize that EPA estimates are simply ESTIMATES and not everyone will meet or exceed those estimates. It's not rocket science.

I wish I had a secretary!

I wouldn't put much faith in the number calculated from one 5.6 gallon fillup.

Pump cutoffs aren't a precise or repeatable measuring tool. A half gallon of cutoff disagreement will skew your results by 9% on a fill up that small.

Wind (tailwind or headwind) can also make a big MPG difference, especially on a long trip.

Honda is magic. The EPA is evil. When we all learn that, the world will be a better place.

Long-Term Fit Road Test's is not the name of the blog, get back to me when you get it right. Many of owners aren't on a Forum message board. Of course you wouldn't want to prove the Fit can get 40mpg at 70mph, it's a fabrication. You have something to prove here, whether you like it or not. If you want to claim 40mpg hwy MPG for a car that gets significantly lower in EPA testing which is done at a lower speed, you should have some PROOF to back up such a claim.

And I'm not talking 40mpg at a 70mph tailwind downhill either where any car would be at an advantage. Of course it's POSSIBLE but it has NOTHING to do with the car itself.

I had a 1995 Escort with 5 sp man. I could get around 40 MPG at around 65......I dont think it is impossible to get 40 at 70....BUT I dont think it is easy or normal. I would expect more like 36-37 MPG. But why get mad about it?

I don't know how the EPA gets their numbers but Natural Resources Canada rates the Fit (manual) at 7.2 L/100km city and 5.7 L/100km Hwy.

That works out to 32.6 mpg city and 41.3 hwy (US gallons). From the Fit owners I've talked to that sounds about right. Fit's seem to average about 6.0 L/100km in all round driving (39 mpg US).

Of course if you drive the snot out of it with the AC on max you will likely get worse.

68 MPH and around 41-42 MPG sounds doable to me.....I am sure it depends on conditions. Now the road and engine noise at that speed would not be as nice as the MPG.

Remember, too, that the automatic version of the Fit is geared for much lower highway rpm than the manual--hence much less engine noise. Still, for me the extra acceleration of the manual version is worth it, especially in my largely suburban commute.

Reminder to agree to disagree in a civil manner and cease with the name-calling. It doesn't further anyone's purpose.

cx7lover, not believing something doesn't make it less true.

Car mag MPGomatic tested the Fit's real world fuel economy. Interesting results:

"We absolutely demolished the official estimates for our five-speed automatic 2009 Honda Fit Sport review unit, scoring an average of 44 MPG on the Interstate highway, with 34.3 MPG combined. Test period temperatures ranged from the thirties through the forties, with freeway speeds between 60 and 72 miles per hour (MPH)."

"Cruise control on / 68 MPH average speed – 42.9 MPG
Cruise control off / 60-72 MPH speed – 45.1 MPG"

http://www.mpgomatic.com/2009/02/09/honda-fit-sport-mpg-review/

Amazing highway MPG from hypermilers which is exactly as I suspected. They also got 28mpg in a Ford Flex, 31 mpg in a V6 Fusion, and 36mpg in the gas guzzling 2.3L Mazda3 and 44.7 MPG in the Mini Clubman.

34.3 MPG combined - Something that is actually achievable and points to a lower average for the highway.

They weren't hypermiling in the Fit. They drove it normally, hence the typical numbers seen by we Fit owners. Fit owners who hypermile have been achieving deep into the 50s.

I hardly think that 68 mph with the cruise control on qualifies as hypermiling. If it does, then I've been doing it since 1982.